Why Place 9/11 With Other Conspiracy Theories?

page: 2
17
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by kaya82
 




One of the highjackers passports survived the initial impact into the towers and also the global collapse of a building but managed to land on the side walk into the hands of the police.

The list of coincedents goes on and you people cannot address them so ypu bark on about laser beams and other disinformtion.

You seem to have a problem with coincedences surrounding 911 but totally accept other coincedences in life.
Explain why in almost every motorcycle crash the riders lose their shoes and boots.
Explain why straws and records embed themselves into trees during tornados.
Explain why one house is skipped in a row of total destruction during a storm.

There are just too many weird things out there for the government to be behind them all.




posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ibiubu
reply to post by hellobruce
 


Nice Straw Man Argument. Epic Fail.


Yes, posts like this are crap and tend to derail threads quickly, particularly in this forum. if you look above, a poster called goodoldave did the exact same thing. Crap.

On topic, I suppose we agree that the events of that day blatantly point to a grand Conspiracy, in the truest sense of the word. This is agreed by people of all ilks across the world.
As to the hows, whos,, etc., they remain mysterious and disagreed upon by many. This is because the truth has been shrouded, and logical, obvious requests for pertinent information have been systematically, constantly denied.
As time passes, disinformation has blended with the semblance of remaining truth that is continuing to be buried. It would hardly be the fault of the people for not knowing, and disagreeing upon, the events of 9/11.
So now that we are all in the same "boat" of of designed darkness, we see the media and posters like above emphasize the FRINGE ideas or disinfo, and and publicly applying it to the group of those seeking truth, as a whole.
This group is then grouped in the eyes of the public with any number of outlandish conspiracies, and subsequently MARGINALIZED.
I think the answer to the OP's question, is that it has been by design.

Intelligent people demanding answers about an event that practically changed the course of modern history, and for the worst, become labeled as conspiracy theorist, and thereby power to demand information is further removed from them.

It has been over a decade, I continue to pray this thing sees light. Remain vigilant; I am grateful to those whom have sought the truth of 9/11, and continue to do so.
Beware of and ignore designed derailments of intelligent discussions in media and forum; the tired tactics of the last 10 years are becoming evermore obvious!



edit on 1-4-2013 by ecapsretuo because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ecapsretuo
As time passes, disinformation has blended with the semblance of remaining truth that is continuing to be buried.


That disinformation comes from the groups pushing their own conspiracy theory, and arguing with each other. For example, were explosives used or thermite used or mini nukes used or beam weapons used or a combination of these used to destroy the buildings? All these methods have been pushed by different conspiracy theory groups, and they cannot all be correct - or can they?


emphasize the FRINGE ideas


Who gets to decide on which particular conspiracy theory about 9/11 is on the fringe?


any number of outlandish conspiracies,


Who decides which conspiracy theory about 9/11 is outlandish?
edit on 1-4-2013 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by hellobruce
 


No one other than you has brought up or even mentioned "lasers from
space." This is a logical fallacy called a strawman, but whatever
man.

Oh, and about the thermite/molten steel. Educate yourself my friend. No, wait, I know the games you people play.

Ad hominem.

Rather than even remotely address any of my questions, you result to calling me names and using strawman tactics to prove I'm some deluded crazy paranoid who thinks the gubments da evil mastamind. I deal with conspiracy fact, not theory, and I've asked you some questions and making an assumption based on your attitude you feel as if you have it figured it out, so answer my questions please.

Thing is, my questions won't be answered. Why haven't you addressed NORAD? Oh yeah, you were busy scoffing off about space laser beams.

If only you were intelligent to understand the definitions of ignorance and irony, now please answer my questions.

EDIT: Yeah judging by your responses to other posters, I see your pattern here. You just make sweeping generalizations and throw any/every conspiracy angle (no matter how outlandish it is, not to mention it hasn't even been brought up) into the mix to prove your point that "it's crazy."

Must be nice up there on your high horse, making sweeping generalizations in order to compensate for your own ignorance with things you don't understand and refuse to explore because you're close-minded know-it-all arrogant behavior.
edit on 1-4-2013 by RomeByFire because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 07:43 PM
link   
The point is that there are genuine questions to be asked that have not been been answered with satisfaction.

Much of what the government said is illogical and all the changes that happened after 9/11 made it seem as if the military industrial complex exploited the situation too "conveniently."

How convenient that we started a huge war, bought a huge amount of weapons, increased travel security, decreased American privacy, and started hating the countries that own oil fields all based off of ONE incident?


I'm sure that it takes a lot of time and powerful people to make this happen almost overnight suggesting that either people have foreseen this and let it happen. Or they planned it.
edit on 4/1/2013 by die_another_day because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by RomeByFire
I deal with conspiracy fact, not theory,


No traces of thermite were found at the WTC, so all you have are your silly conspiracy theories. No facts at all.



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by RomeByFire
I deal with conspiracy fact, not theory,


No traces of thermite were found at the WTC, so all you have are your silly conspiracy theories. No facts at all.


I'm sorry but a two sentence response with no source isn't all that credible. I'll go with the word of people like Niels Harrit and Mark Basile who are accredited in their fields, and their findings.

Care to answer any other questions posed in this thread or was that one question satisfactory enough in your opinion?



posted on Apr, 2 2013 @ 01:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by RomeByFire

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by RomeByFire
I deal with conspiracy fact, not theory,


No traces of thermite were found at the WTC, so all you have are your silly conspiracy theories. No facts at all.


I'm sorry but a two sentence response with no source isn't all that credible. I'll go with the word of people like Niels Harrit and Mark Basile who are accredited in their fields, and their findings.

Care to answer any other questions posed in this thread or was that one question satisfactory enough in your opinion?



Perhaps you haven't seen this more recent report by Dr James Millette of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences :-

dl.dropbox.com...



posted on Apr, 2 2013 @ 02:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
Perhaps you haven't seen this more recent report by Dr James Millette of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences :-

dl.dropbox.com...


Truthers would prefer to believe a document published in a pay to publish journal that will publish any nonsense as long as you pay over a proper technical paper!



posted on Apr, 2 2013 @ 03:39 AM
link   
reply to post by die_another_day
 


The answer here is simple - because it is a conspiracy theory.

Just because you believe something, does not make it fact. It simply makes it your belief.

And yes, a lot of people believe stuff about 9/11, but then, a lot of people believe in UFO's, bigfoot, ghosts, cryptids, religions etc.



posted on Apr, 2 2013 @ 05:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by ibiubu
reply to post by hellobruce
 


Nice Straw Man Argument. Epic Fail.


Says the man creating a straw man argument.....The post you replied to was in direct reply to the question; why is 9/11 conspiracies placed into the same caliber as other conspiracies (which could all be filled into one logical fallacy). They pointed out the extreme examples that people have presented. Those are all valid as a simple search can bring them all up here.

Not a straw-man; a valid answer to a valid question in my estimation. Don't let your emotional attachment to the premise drive your conclusions ibiubu.



posted on Apr, 2 2013 @ 05:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by die_another_day
The point is that there are genuine questions to be asked that have not been been answered with satisfaction.

Much of what the government said is illogical and all the changes that happened after 9/11 made it seem as if the military industrial complex exploited the situation too "conveniently."


Well you have levied your conclusion before you even asked the question. You have already made your understanding that the answers given will be "convenient", which will instantly push away anyone that wants to have an intelligent conversation about 9/11 and is a beacon to those who want the ambiguity of "what ifs".


How convenient that we started a huge war, bought a huge amount of weapons, increased travel security, decreased American privacy, and started hating the countries that own oil fields all based off of ONE incident?


Honest question, but who wants to touch it given your stance? All the answers contrary to your predetermined believe will be "convenient"; so why even bother?



posted on Apr, 2 2013 @ 05:44 AM
link   
A single friendly warning on the matter. Discussing other members, especially inferring that they are, or might be "shills" is absolutely unacceptable and will not be tolerated. I would ask that everyone involved take a deep breath, read the header over this forum - the one that says "Any Terms & Conditions infraction in the 9/11 forum may result in the termination of your account without warning" - and focus upon debating the facts and not one another.



posted on Apr, 2 2013 @ 07:19 AM
link   
Of course 9/11 is a conspiracy theory and yes it’s just as “crazy” as UFOs.

Let’s take the usual conspiracy; Bin laden was a CIA agent who with the backing of his masters sent hijackers to fly into high-profile public buildings the pentagon and world trade centre. They don’t actually know for sure what flight 93 was all about so let’s ignore that one because it’s uncomfortable. Furthermore in addition this, because flying planes into buildings wasn’t enough they managed to rig up two off the busiest buildings in the worlds with enough explosives to blow them up. They, the US government or elements of done all of this as a justification for a war in Afghanistan, Iraq and erode civil liberties.

That is the least crazy conspiracy of 9/11. If you want to take it further then it wasn’t the US government behind it no it was the evil NWO, and it wasn’t planes the planes never existed they were holograms and the actually used a nuke to blow up the buildings or a laser from space. Ohh and no plane ever hit the pentagon it was a missile (the passengers from that plane evaporated like flight 93). Or it was the Israelis, we don’t know how they put the explosives in the buildings or launched the missile but it was them.

At the very least the “official” conspiracy theory is at least plausible and for the most part consistant. Walk into a room of 10 9/11 “Truthers” and all 10 will give you a different account of that day, walk into a room of 10 “OSers” and all 10 will tell you broadly the same story.

Part of the problem on ATS is that so many members have this pathetically poor understanding of history that they believe it is an absolute fact that 9/11 was a false flag. There is a presumption that the “truthers” truth is the right truth when they evidence to back it up is hysterical.



posted on Apr, 2 2013 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by kaya82
 




One of the highjackers passports survived the initial impact into the towers and also the global collapse of a building but managed to land on the side walk into the hands of the police.

The list of coincedents goes on and you people cannot address them so ypu bark on about laser beams and other disinformtion.

You seem to have a problem with coincedences surrounding 911 but totally accept other coincedences in life.
Explain why in almost every motorcycle crash the riders lose their shoes and boots.
Explain why straws and records embed themselves into trees during tornados.
Explain why one house is skipped in a row of total destruction during a storm.

There are just too many weird things out there for the government to be behind them all.




wtf ???




Explain why in almost every motorcycle crash the riders lose their shoes and boots. Explain why straws and records embed themselves into trees during tornados. Explain why one house is skipped in a row of total destruction during a storm.



None of these examples preclude a giant fireball that eats away anything combustible.


Edit:

let's put it this way...

place 2 cardboard boxes...fill them up with paper. Than place gasoline canister in one and set it of to explode.

Take a second box and put it in path of a raging tornado.


Question: which of the above methods would you bet on to produce "readable paper debris" ?
edit on 2-4-2013 by MarioOnTheFly because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2013 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 


It is a straw man argument that does not address the OP.

So, what is your point? That I made a point?

911 discussions are clouded by arguments that stray from the topic of discussion. It's as if someone is trying to control information or spew out disinformation
Can't be discussed according to some. Pathetic!


The proposal was to relax laws on beer. Person B has exaggerated this to a position harder to defend, i.e., "unrestricted access to intoxicants". It is a logical fallacy because Person A never made that claim.
A: Sunny days are good.
B: If all days were sunny, we'd never have rain, and without rain, we'd have famine and death.
In this case, B falsely frames A's claim to imply that A believes only sunny days are good, and B argues against that assertion. A actually asserts that sunny days are good and, in fact, says nothing about rainy days.


Here's the source...

Wiki Fool



posted on Apr, 2 2013 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by hellobruce
 


Yes there were. The thermate signature is evidenced by the microstructural analysis of the A36 steel I-beams from WTC 2. The presence of iron sulfide in the austenitic matrix confirms localized re-melting in the presence of sulfur used to lower thermate reaction temperatures.

We've been over this before. What other threads do you post on hellobruce?



posted on Apr, 2 2013 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Alfie1? Do you guys all live together? Must be tough to shower in the morning.

Anyway, a poster posts something ABOUT who he believes and WHY, and YOU post an article about an epoxy coating analysis on the STEEL I-BEAMS from a scientist/researcher NOT mentioned by the poster!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nano--thermate is DISINFORMAtion PROPagated by YOU.

Do you wish to comment on the microstructural evidence of thermate on HSLA steel as evidenced by Appdx C?

Or another straw man perhaps? Guess repetition is the oldest form of mind control. NEVA worked on me.



posted on Apr, 2 2013 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by ecapsretuo

Originally posted by ibiubu
reply to post by hellobruce
 


Nice Straw Man Argument. Epic Fail.


Yes, posts like this are crap and tend to derail threads quickly, particularly in this forum. if you look above, a poster called goodoldave did the exact same thing. Crap.


I'm no trying to derail anything. I'm asking legitimate questions. The OP expressed wonder at why the 9/11 conspiracy is considered a conspiracy rather than (presumably) sincere research, and I pointed out there are so many accusations that it's getting to the point that they are not only contradictory but outright toxic to each other. There is no way you can deny this; if the planes were remote controlled then they're certainly not going to be holograms or missiles. If the towers were destroyed by tactical nukes then these conspirators aren't going to waste their time using some pipsqueak controlled demolitions. If Mossad was secretly behind it then Bush and the US gov't aren't responsible, and in fact they'd be just as much of a victim as they were before. The list goes on and on. You're saying this ISN'T because so many people are simply seeing what they themselves want to see, like one big Rorschach test?

It's an honest question and it deserves an honest answer...and no, blaming everything on sinister secret agents isn't an honest answer.



posted on Apr, 2 2013 @ 11:11 AM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.





new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join